ArticleDrug design, development and therapy2016
Efficacy of an acquainted drug in the treatment of inflammatory low back pain: sulfasalazine under investigation.
Article in Drug design, development and therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Increase in axial spondyloarthritis diagnoses after the introduction of the ASAS criteria: a systematic review.Rheumatology international · 2023Pooled it
- A Possible Role of Intestinal Microbiota in the Pathogenesis of Ankylosing Spondylitis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the current study, the overall prevalence and the main underlying etiologies of inflammatory low back pain (ILBP) were determined, and the effectiveness of treatment with sulfasalazine was investigated in patients with inflammatory versus mechanical low back pain (LBP). In a prospective study conducted from July 2013 until August 2015, 1,779 consecutive patients within the age range of 18-50 years with a primary complaint of LBP referring to the rheumatology clinics were included. The patients were classified into two distinct groups: those suffering from ILBP (n=118) and those having mechanical LBP (n=1,661). Patients were followed-up for assessing the response rate to sulfasalazine with a mean follow-up time of 16 months. Results showed that among the total number of participants, 6.6% suffered from ILBP. The main underlying diagnoses of ILBP were undifferentiated spondyloarthropathy (USpA) (61.0%) and ankylosing spondylitis (24.6%). During the follow-up period, 3.4% of the participants had an appropriate response to only nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 57.6% to sulfasalazine, 26.3% to addition of methotrexate to the previous regimen, and 12.7% to biological agents. Multiple logistic regression results showed that the underlying disease had a significant effect on the sulfasalazine response. The odds for response to treatment was 3.53 times higher in USpA patients compared to other patients (odds ratio =3.53, 95% confidence interval: 1.63-7.68,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.